SMS text messaging is very popular service worldwide. Telecommunications network providers have seen an enormous increase in SMS traffic, and there is no indication that the amount of SMS traffic will do anything but continue to increase at the same or greater rate. SMS subscribers desire the ability to send unlimited text messages, and network providers have often either provided unlimited text messaging as a premium feature for which subscribers must pay extra, or offered unlimited text messaging as a standard feature to entice new customers. However, unlimited SMS or MMS messaging raises a number of potential problems with which network providers must deal.
One problem is that a network provider's subscribers may receive unwanted SMS text messages, also referred to as “spam” messages, from a foreign network, i.e., from a network other than the receiver's network provider. Where the sender of the unwanted messages is a subscriber of a foreign network, the sender is not under control of the network that receives them, and therefore cannot be charged extra for the volume of spam traffic or have their subscriber accounts revoked, etc. For this reason network providers may desire a mechanism by which the volume of foreign-originated SMS, and particularly foreign-originated mobile-terminated (MT) SMS may be controlled.
Another problem is that for networks that charge the subscriber for each received text message, a subscriber that receives a large number of SMS messages may incur a large bill through no action of their own but because of the actions of others, i.e., the senders of the many SMS messages that the subscriber received. The dismay or outrage felt by the subscriber at having to pay an unexpectedly large bill is sometimes referred to as “bill-shock”. A subscriber may be even more aggravated when the subscriber is charged for receiving messages that they never wanted in the first place, such as spam SMS message. To prevent the subscriber from feeling that they were punished for the actions of others, network providers may desire a mechanism to limit the number of MT SMS messages that a subscriber can receive during a particular period, either on a per-subscriber basis or a per-class-of-subscriber basis. Such a mechanism could protect a subscriber from having to pay for unwanted SMS messages that came from a foreign network or from the subscriber's own network as well.
Yet another problem for networks that provide “unlimited” mobile-originated (MO) SMS messages is that the network provider must make some assumptions about what would be the maximum number of SMS messages that could be sent by a real subscriber, and deploy a sufficient amount of network hardware to support the estimated amount of traffic produced by all of the subscribers. While an actual subscriber might send only tens, hundreds, or even thousands of text messages in a month, computerized systems that generate spam SMS messages could send tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of SMS messages during the same period. When this happens, the network may not have the capacity to support the huge volume of SMS messages that are generated by bulk spamming operations. For this reason, network providers may desire a mechanism by which the volume of MO SMS messages may be controlled, particularly on a per-subscriber basis. A related problem is that there may be times when a large number of subscribers may attempt to send a large number of text messages, such as during religious holidays or during a local or national emergency. In such situations a network provider may desire a mechanism by which the number of MO SMS messages that can be sent by each of certain subscribers, certain classes of subscribers, or even all subscribers may be limited.
Subscribers also may desire the ability to limit or control SMS messages. For example, a subscriber may want to block SMS messages that are sent from specific numbers, commonly referred to as “blacklisting”, or a subscriber may want to allow SMS messages only from specific numbers, commonly referred to as “whitelisting.” Parents may desire to set limits on the number of SMS messages that a child may send or receive. For this reason, network subscribers may desire a mechanism by which incoming and outgoing SMS messages may be controlled. Likewise, a network provider may desire to offer such a mechanism to its subscribers.
All of the above-mentioned problems with SMS messaging also apply to MMS messaging as well.
Accordingly, there exists a need for mechanisms by which network providers or network subscribers may limit or control the volume of certain types of SMS or MMS traffic, including local/foreign-originated MT SMS or MMS messages, MO SMS or MMS messages from certain users, and/or MT SMS or MMS messages to certain users. More specifically, there exists a need for methods, systems, and computer readable media for SMS or MMS policy control.